| ??? 09/25/06 08:47 Read: times |
#124974 - to HLL or not to HLL Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Neil said:
In particular, this can show up timing problems; the timings of the "real" (optimised) and "debug" (non-optimised) code will be different - so bugs that manifest in the "real" (optimised) system may well not manifest in the "debug" (non-optimised) version! Well, if you dare to use a HLL in timing-critical real-time application... bear the consequences. Andy Neil said:
Another one is memory usage: ditto Andy Neil said:
Then, of course, there's the just plain bad 'C' code[...] Yeah, if you write code in C rather than program, it's just plain bad... :-) I agree with Jez - you shouldn't use HLL unless you have enough of resources anyway - so it should work in the unoptimized version anyway, the optimisation should give you perhaps some extra reserve or so (in other words, you shouldn't rely on the optimisation). Of course I am exagerrating. Jan Waclawek (the C hater) |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| debuging C code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Management solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I kind of hope | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| False assumption | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| to HLL or not to HLL | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Things for which an HLL cannot be trusted... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sometimes there's no other way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| that was not me, but Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Timing - end of wrong stick | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thats not the point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| better, don't use C at all.. :-) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| experience and knowledge | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the key word is "manifest" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| NASA | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| against NASA rules, sorry Andy posted before | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Testing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Pointers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| In the real world | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| worse than that | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
customers complaining or not ... | 01/01/70 00:00 |